Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] add -p (built-in): do not color the progress indicator separately
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Nov 15, 2020, 23:55 UTC
- Message-ID
- <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2011160054460.18437@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
- In-Reply-To
- <d0603db3-a6d8-d71b-1ee0-4c5c51b00da2@gmail.com>
Hi Phillip,
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020, Phillip Wood wrote:
Show 24 quoted lines
> On 13/11/2020 13:57, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > On Fri, 13 Nov 2020, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > > > On 11/11/2020 12:28, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote: > > > > From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> > > > > > > > > The Perl version of this command colors the progress indicator and the > > > > prompt message in one go, let's do the same in the built-in version. > > > > > > Why? the C version has access to an api that means we don't have to > > > remember to print the reset string each time so why move away from > > > that? I don't think it matters to the user that there are some extra > > > escape codes in the prompt of the C version. The answer is probably > > > "so we can use the same test as the perl version" which might be a > > > good reason - if it is I think it would be helpful to say so in the > > > commit message. > > > > Honestly, the number one reason is so that the _same_ test passes using > > the Perl version as well as with the built-in version, something that is > > required by the `linux-clang` job in our CI build. > > That's what I assumed - it would be good to document that in the commit > message.
I did that:
add -p (built-in): do not color the progress indicator separately
The Perl version of this command colors the progress indicator and the
prompt message in one go. Let's do the same in the built-in version so that the same upcoming test
(which will compare the output of `git add -p` against a known-good
version) will pass both for the Perl version as well as for the built-in
version.Show 5 quoted lines
> > I am not really willing to change this, unless I hear a goooood reason to > > complicate the test. > > I guess we could change the perl version to match the C version as it is the > perl version that will be retired but I'm not that fussed
Well, since we want to supersede the Perl version by the built-in version, the latter needs to imitate the former, no?
Ciao, Dscho